The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Hagel and a Nuclear Iran -- Perfect Together

by Edward Olshaker

Sounding indistinguishable from Noam Chomsky or Rev. Jeremiah Wright, former Sen. Chuck Hagel agreed in an Al Jazeera interview that the United States is "the world's bully" and has depicted Israel as a cruel oppressor, yet appears to have little similar concern about the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran.

To
the contrary, Hagel has gone so far as to argue that any government
(even an openly genocidal jihadist regime) possessing such a weapon
would naturally respond to the gravity of their new responsibility with
common sense, prudence, and sanity.

Hagel's
depiction of the U.S. and Israel as the world's chief troublemakers and
jihadists as benign eerily echoes the worldview of Michael Moore, who
has declared "Americans kill people," Israelis "know they are wrong,"
and "There is no [Islamic] terror threat." It comes as no surprise that
Moore, the Iranian regime, Time magazine's Joe Klein, David
Duke, Oliver Stone, and others in the progressive-Islamist-neo-Nazi
alliance endorse Obama's "bipartisan" choice for defense secretary.
Leading Democratic senators are on board, along with the online
activists of the "white nationalist" Stormfront, where one member cited
Hagel's "Let the Jews pay for it" quote, and wrote, "I love this guy!"
You can't say Obama hasn't brought people together.

Hagel's numerous troubling votes and statements as a senator are ultimately overshadowed by something astoundingly naïve and chilling he wrote in his book: The
genie of nuclear armaments is already out of the bottle, no matter what
Iran does. In this imperfect world, sovereign nation-states possessing
nuclear weapons capability ...will often respond with some degree of
responsible, or at least sane, behavior...

The
mother of Newtown mass murderer Adam Lanza appeared to hold a similar
view, believing that placing deadly weapons in her son's hands and
training him in their use would instill responsibility and bring
stability to his life.

With
the gun-control issue overshadowing all else these days, opponents of
the Hagel nomination would be wise to cast his alarmingly irrational
view in terms of the one aspect of the gun issue everyone agrees on:
Guns -- and infinitely deadlier weapons -- must be kept out of the hands
of the criminally insane. And no informed person can be unaware that
the Iranian regime's open goal of murder-suicide in an apocalyptic final
war differs from the Lanza massacre only in degree.

Incredibly
for a potential Secretary of Defense, Hagel's prediction of the likely
conduct of "sovereign nation-states possessing nuclear weapons
capability" does not distinguish between jihadist and non-jihadist
governments or acknowledge the reality of Iran's martyrdom culture. When
President Ahmadinejad
called the desire to commit suicide "one of the best ways of life," he
was not only praising suicide bombers but also reiterating the goal of
national murder-suicide announced by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1981: "I say
let Iran go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest
of the world."

Similarly, in a speech urging the Muslim world to destroy Israel, Iran's Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani sadistically explained the
nuclear math: "application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing
in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim
world." He further assured the world that Iran could handle the cost of "thirty or forty million martyrs."

As Mitt Romney emphasized,
the Soviet Union "was never suicidal. Soviet commitment to national
survival was never in question. That assumption cannot be made to an
irrational regime that celebrates martyrdom." The critical distinction
noted by Romney is a distinction Hagel has a history of willfully
ignoring.

Imagine
what a gracious and reassuring gesture it would have been if Obama had
expressed his alleged bipartisanship by nominating Romney (or any
mainstream Republican) as defense secretary. Ironically, after smearing
Romney and the Republicans as bigots, Obama has gone out of his way to
nominate an actual, rare Republican bigot, whose prejudice matches the
fringe anti-Israel bias instilled in him by his radical mentors. And,
coming 4 years after Obama's remarkably similar nominations of Chas Freeman and Van Jones,
it is clear he chose Hagel because of, not in spite of, his hostility
to Jews and their legitimate interests. (Had Obama similarly punished
any other minority so steadfastly loyal to him, they -- and America in
general -- would never have tolerated it.)

As
troubling as this is, it's also an opportunity for Republicans opposed
to Hagel to really shine by countering this shrewd, divisive
"bipartisan" nomination with a true bipartisan response. Because there
are qualified Democrats, even including some archliberals, who staunchly
support Israel's security, Republicans who vote no on Hagel could
jointly announce their support for one of them as an alternative.

The
choice of Hagel is a reminder of what's in Obama's heart, and has
already succeeded in its intended purpose. This nomination has punished
his loyal Jewish supporters, delighted the rulers of Iran, brought new
reason for despair to Israel, and needlessly pitted Americans against
each other. In this sense, it's already "mission accomplished" for the
great uniter, regardless of the outcome of this week's confirmation
hearings.

Yet,
even in this battle they're unlikely to win, it is essential that
Republicans stand on principle and vigorously oppose Obama's
legitimization and empowerment of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, anti-gay,
soft-on-terror views. There is a direct line connecting Farrakhan's
disparagement of Jews and gays when Obama helped organize his historic
march, and similar statements by Hagel. If the opposition party does not
expose this administration's radicalism, its policies that treat
Netanyahu as a foe and the genocide-espousing Muslim Brotherhood as a
friend, who will? The media? Remaining silent was a losing strategy for
Romney, while bold, principled opposition (by members of both parties)
stopped the attempted appointments of Chas Freeman and Van Jones. Even
in this season of defeat and discouragement, the fight against hate and
extremism must not stop.